[Bug libstdc++/37811] bind1st fails on mem_fun with reference argument

["paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

------- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com  2008-10-13 16:23 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
> Ah - I was looking at language DR109, not library DR109. However, the correct
> DR says the committee approved the example reported here (and adds the fix) so
> gcc appears to be in error to fail it.

That't *not* true. The example in DR 109 does *not* compile if the additional
operator() are not added and does when the resolution of DR 109 is implemented.

 However, there is the curious remark:
>     "Howard believes there is a flaw in this resolution. See c++std-lib-9127. 
>      We may need to reopen this issue."

In any case, this is moot. As I tried to explain, nobody really cares these
days about those bind1st and bind2nd binders, in the CD1 C++0x are already in
an appendix, as deprecated features, with the exact resolution of issue DR 109
included, as we are doing.

> Unfortunately Google turns up nothing for "c++std-lib-9127" except this cryptic
> message, and just "9127" and other variations aren't productive either. Can you
> tell me where to find it?

It's a message to the ISO library reflector. Really, given the above, I would
suggest not wasting further time...


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37811